Matrix Multiply Methods. Some general facts about matmul High computation to communication hides...

Matrix Multiply Methods

Some general facts about matmul

• High computation to communication hides multitude of sins

• Many “symmetries” meaning that the basic O(n3) algorithm can be reordered many ways

• As always must imagine data tied to a processor, or data in other ways

Think 64x64 processor grid>> A=ones(64,1)*(0:63); B=A’;>> subplot(121),imagesc(A), axis('square')>> subplot(122),imagesc(A'), axis('square')

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

Colors show cols of A and rows of B

Colors only match on the diagonals

Think 64x64 processor grid>> A=ones(64,1)*(1:64); B=A’;>> subplot(121),imagesc(A), axis('square')>> subplot(122),imagesc(A'), axis('square')

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

Colors show cols of A and rows of B

Colors only match on the diagonals

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

In symbols

• Aij and Bij

• Column of first matches row of second if j=i

• Using 0 based indexing let plus,minus denote modulo n

• Cij =Ai,i-j Dij=Bi-j,j

• A shifts by columns, B shifts by rows• Now colors match as required for matmul • Diag of C(D) now has 0th column of A (0th row of B)

In pictures

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

20 40 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

10 20 30 40 50 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

• At kth timestep k=0,1,…,n-1 let• Cij =Ai,i-j-k Dij=Bi-j-k,j

• Colors match again• What else would work?

Canon with bitxor (Edelman, Johnson,.)

• At kth timestep k=0,1,…,n-1 let• Cij =Ai,i-j-k Dij=Bi-j-k,j

• Implement by moving C left 1, and D up 1 at every cycle• Colors match again• What else would work? This is the kind of thinking that

goes into good parallel algorithm design• Cij =Ai,i * j * k Dij=Bi * j * k,j where “*” denotes bitxor • What do we need, column/row index match• Cycle through all indices

Bitxor• v=[]; for i=1:8, v(i,:)=bitxor( (0:7),i); end• v = 1 0 3 2 5 4 7 6 2 3 0 1 6 7 4 5 3 2 1 0 7 6 5 4 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 5 4 7 6 1 0 3 2 6 7 4 5 2 3 0 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

In Canon can go left/up or right/down(-k or +k equally good)

• Can even go left/up and right/down

• Think of this as evens left/up and odds Right/down

• Can thereby use north,south, east, west on a processor grid

ALeft ARight BUp

BDown

On a hypercube

• Hypercubes are connected by bitxor with powers of 2

• Gray Codes connect into cycles

• Point not so much hypercubes and Gray codes but the underlying structure of a matmul

2/27/08

CS267 Guest Lecture 1 12

Pros and Cons of CannonAccording to cs267 berkeley

• Local computation one call to (optimized) matrix-multiply

• Hard to generalize for • ( AE: Don’t think any of these are right. Don’t believe

everything you read)– p not a perfect square– A and B not square– Dimensions of A, B not perfectly divisible by s=sqrt(p)– A and B not “aligned” in the way they are stored on processors– block-cyclic layouts

• Memory hog (extra copies of local matrices)

In any event

• This algorithm is communicate, compute, communicate, compute

• If hardware allows of course one can overlap• In the end these are all owner compute

algorithms where the blocks of Aix and Bxy find their way to the owner (lots of people just broadcast it around at the theoretical cost of more memory and more bandwidth, but probably not in practice)

What does an n3 matmul require

• One way or another the products happen somewhere and the adds happen somewhere

• That‘s it. • Today bottlenecks may be from main memory

and nothing else matters.

What if

• We are allowed to break up a matrix as in matmul arbitrarily but no cost to the matmul itself as if there were just a foo that needed to bring together A(i,j) and B(j,k) and combine with a commutative and associative operator? What is the best way?